Khan: ‘I’ll fight council over Mr Monkey costs’

NOT A FOREGONE CONCLUSION ... Ahmed Khan.

A FORMER South Tyneside councillor embroiled in a Town Hall bid to unmask internet blogger Mr Monkey says he will fight a £56,000 court bill “every step of the way”.

After spending £214,000 of taxpayers’ money over five years, council bosses have called off their search for those responsible for the controversial blog, as reported in yesterday’s Gazette.

Ahmed Khan, ex-independent representative for the Beacon and Bents ward in South Shields, has always denied any involvement with the Mr Monkey blog, which posted defamatory accusations about borough council employees, elected members and their families.

But he still faces a bill of $97,475.96 – which equates to £56,803 – after his own counter legal action to block the council’s hunt was thrown out in a US court.

Mr Khan said he intended to defend “robustly” any attempt by the council to recover costs against him in a UK court.

He told the Gazette: “It’s a US judgement that will need to go through the UK courts.

‘Evidence’

“It is not a foregone conclusion that it can be enforced. I will challenge it every step of the way and will give new evidence provided to me.”

The Mr Monkey blog first appeared in 2008 and, a year later, the council hired Washington-based lawyers McDermott, Will and Emery to unmask those behind it on behalf of four plaintiffs – council leader Iain Malcolm, Labour colleague Coun Anne Walsh, late Conservative and UKIP councillor David Potts and local authority regeneration chief Rick O’Farrell – insisting it had a “duty of care” towards its staff.

The action went through the US courts because that is where WordPress, the online publishing platform, is based.

Mr Khan, who had his computer records and Twitter accounts accessed as part of the legal probe, later filed an anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits against Public Participation) motion at San Mateo County Court in California which called on the council to abandon its search.

But the court dismissed his anti-SLAPP motion in 2011, describing it as “frivolous”.

A subsequent appeal was rejected and, in September last year, a court costs order of $97,475.96 was made against Mr Khan.

The council confirmed it was “progressing the process” to recover the costs of the failed Anti-SLAPP motion. It said if the amount remains unpaid, recovery proceedings will be issued in the English courts.

But Mr Khan has called on Couns Malcolm and Walsh to personally pay their share of the council’s legal bill – which he claims is nearer £500,000.

Mr Khan said: “I wasn’t surprised when I heard that the case had been dropped. They had not got anywhere over a significant period of time.

“This case was always an attempt to link me to that bloke, to access my Twitter account and all for what?

“The council made a point of saying they had a duty of care to protect their staff.

“But that duty of care should not include councillors. Coun Potts is dead but Iain Malcolm and Anne Walsh should pay up – the public shouldn’t be left with the bill.”

Mr Khan also claims the cost of the Mr Monkey hunt was “nearer half a million pounds”, adding: “The council’s figure doesn’t take into account the cost they paid for technical advice from IT specialists in the UK and the US.

“It doesn’t include the cost of obtaining legal advice in the UK. The figure they cite only includes the cost of the US lawyers. It doesn’t include the significant number of man hours spent on the case by senior council officers.”

Mr Khan also backed a call from independent councillor George Elsom for council leader Iain Malcolm to resign and revealed the personal cost to himself of the case – he suffered both a heart attack and lost his seat on the council.

He added: “I have lost my seat, my health and finances have suffered. I have suffered emotionally. But despite the £500,000 spent – I ain’t Mr Monkey.”

McDermott, Will and Emery produced an 18-page dossier for the council in July 2011 which said Mr Monkey was most likely a two-man operation.

It also said a libel action would be “highly successful” if pursued through the UK or US courts.

But last month an application was successfully made by the plaintiffs to the Superior Court of California (County of San Mateo) to have the case dismissed and, to this date, no one has ever been publicly named as being behind the Mr Monkey blog.

Coun Malcolm refused to comment on calls for his resignation but a spokeswoman for the local authority responded to Mr Khan’s claims that the £214,000 bill was considerably higher and that its “duty of care” should not have extended to councillors.

She said: “We believe that the duty of care does extend to members, and in any event the costs incurred would not have been significantly lower if the members had not been parties to the action.

“No significant legal costs were incurred in the UK before the US action was issued. The net spend will be circa £157,000 when the $97,475 has been recovered from Mr Khan.

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Independent Press Standards Organisation's Editors' Code of Practice.
If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the
Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the IPSO by
clicking here.

Shields Gazette provides news, events and sport features from the South Shields area. For the best up to date information relating to South Shields and the surrounding areas visit us at Shields Gazette regularly or bookmark this page.

For you to enjoy all the features of this website Shields Gazette requires permission to use cookies.

Find Out More ▼

What is a Cookie?

What is a Flash Cookie?

Can I opt out of receiving Cookies?

About our Cookies

Cookies are small data files which are sent to your browser (Internet Explorer, Firefox, Chrome etc) from a website you visit. They are stored on your electronic device.

This is a type of cookie which is collected by Adobe Flash media player (it is also called a Local Shared Object) - a piece of software you may already have on your electronic device to help you watch online videos and listen to podcasts.

Yes there are a number of options available, you can set your browser either to reject all cookies, to allow only "trusted" sites to set them, or to only accept them from the site you are currently on.

However, please note - if you block/delete all cookies, some features of our websites, such as remembering your login details, or the site branding for your local newspaper may not function as a result.

The types of cookies we, our ad network and technology partners use are listed below:

Revenue Science ►

A tool used by some of our advertisers to target adverts to you based on pages you have visited in the past. To opt out of this type of targeting you can visit the 'Your Online Choices' website by clicking here.

Google Ads ►

Our sites contain advertising from Google; these use cookies to ensure you get adverts relevant to you. You can tailor the type of ads you receive by visiting here or to opt out of this type of targeting you can visit the 'Your Online Choices' website by clicking here.

Digital Analytics ►

This is used to help us identify unique visitors to our websites. This data is anonymous and we cannot use this to uniquely identify individuals and their usage of the sites.

Dart for Publishers ►

This comes from our ad serving technology and is used to track how many times you have seen a particular ad on our sites, so that you don't just see one advert but an even spread. This information is not used by us for any other type of audience recording or monitoring.

ComScore ►

ComScore monitor and externally verify our site traffic data for use within the advertising industry. Any data collected is anonymous statistical data and cannot be traced back to an individual.

Local Targeting ►

Our Classified websites (Photos, Motors, Jobs and Property Today) use cookies to ensure you get the correct local newspaper branding and content when you visit them. These cookies store no personally identifiable information.

Grapeshot ►

We use Grapeshot as a contextual targeting technology, allowing us to create custom groups of stories outside out of our usual site navigation. Grapeshot stores the categories of story you have been exposed to. Their privacy policy and opt out option can be accessed here.

Subscriptions Online ►

Our partner for Newspaper subscriptions online stores data from the forms you complete in these to increase the usability of the site and enhance user experience.

Add This ►

Add This provides the social networking widget found in many of our pages. This widget gives you the tools to bookmark our websites, blog, share, tweet and email our content to a friend.